Cardiac scoring systems, coronary artery disease and major adverse cardiovascular events: A scoping review.

IF 1.2 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Preesha Premsagar, Colleen Aldous, Tonya Esterhuizen
{"title":"Cardiac scoring systems, coronary artery disease and major adverse cardiovascular events: A scoping review.","authors":"Preesha Premsagar,&nbsp;Colleen Aldous,&nbsp;Tonya Esterhuizen","doi":"10.4102/safp.v65i1.5683","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared coronary artery disease (CAD) as the leading cause of death globally for the last 20 years. Early screening and detection (primary prevention) and intervention (secondary prevention) are necessary to curb CAD and major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) prevalence. A scoping review to assess the current literature on using cardiac scoring systems to predict CAD and MACE was performed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The research question 'What is the literature on using cardiac scoring systems to predict CAD and MACE?' was addressed. The updated Arksey and O'Malley and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews methodologies were used. The search terms 'coronary artery disease' and 'cardiac scoring systems' and 'major adverse cardiovascular events' were used in the Boolean search on PubMed, ScienceDirect, MedLine and Cochrane Library.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The final list consisted of 19 published English results after the year 2000. There were six results without participants (four clinical guidelines, one review article and one ongoing clinical trial). Scoring systems were cardiovascular risk estimation systems focusing on the primary prevention of CAD; MACE was discussed but not scored. There were 13 robust results published from completed multinational clinical trials with participants. These results focused on a scoring system for the secondary prevention of CAD and MACE.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Scoring systems remain an objective method for primary and secondary prevention of CAD and MACE.Contribution: Scoring systems may be helpful with clinical uncertainty or to standardise patient results for comparison in research.</p>","PeriodicalId":22040,"journal":{"name":"South African Family Practice","volume":"65 1","pages":"e1-e8"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10476223/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Family Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/safp.v65i1.5683","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared coronary artery disease (CAD) as the leading cause of death globally for the last 20 years. Early screening and detection (primary prevention) and intervention (secondary prevention) are necessary to curb CAD and major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) prevalence. A scoping review to assess the current literature on using cardiac scoring systems to predict CAD and MACE was performed.

Methods: The research question 'What is the literature on using cardiac scoring systems to predict CAD and MACE?' was addressed. The updated Arksey and O'Malley and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews methodologies were used. The search terms 'coronary artery disease' and 'cardiac scoring systems' and 'major adverse cardiovascular events' were used in the Boolean search on PubMed, ScienceDirect, MedLine and Cochrane Library.

Results: The final list consisted of 19 published English results after the year 2000. There were six results without participants (four clinical guidelines, one review article and one ongoing clinical trial). Scoring systems were cardiovascular risk estimation systems focusing on the primary prevention of CAD; MACE was discussed but not scored. There were 13 robust results published from completed multinational clinical trials with participants. These results focused on a scoring system for the secondary prevention of CAD and MACE.

Conclusion: Scoring systems remain an objective method for primary and secondary prevention of CAD and MACE.Contribution: Scoring systems may be helpful with clinical uncertainty or to standardise patient results for comparison in research.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

心脏评分系统、冠状动脉疾病和主要心血管不良事件:范围界定综述。
背景:2019年,世界卫生组织(世界卫生组织)宣布冠状动脉疾病(CAD)为过去20年全球主要死亡原因。早期筛查和检测(一级预防)和干预(二级预防)对于遏制CAD和重大心血管不良事件(MACE)的流行是必要的。对使用心脏评分系统预测CAD和MACE的现有文献进行了范围界定审查。方法:研究问题“关于使用心脏评分系统预测CAD和MACE的文献有哪些?”已解决。使用了更新的Arksey和O'Malley以及系统评价的首选报告项目和范围界定评价方法的荟萃分析扩展。在PubMed、ScienceDirect、MedLine和Cochrane Library上的布尔搜索中使用了“冠状动脉疾病”、“心脏评分系统”和“主要心血管不良事件”这两个搜索词。有六个结果没有参与者(四个临床指南,一篇综述文章和一个正在进行的临床试验)。评分系统是心血管风险评估系统,侧重于CAD的初级预防;讨论了MACE,但没有得分。已经完成的多国临床试验有13项强有力的结果发表。这些结果集中在CAD和MACE二级预防的评分系统上。结论:评分系统仍然是CAD和MACE一级和二级预防中的一种客观方法。贡献:评分系统可能有助于解决临床不确定性或标准化患者结果,以便在研究中进行比较。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
South African Family Practice
South African Family Practice MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
20.00%
发文量
79
审稿时长
25 weeks
期刊介绍: South African Family Practice (SAFP) is a peer-reviewed scientific journal, which strives to provide primary care physicians and researchers with a broad range of scholarly work in the disciplines of Family Medicine, Primary Health Care, Rural Medicine, District Health and other related fields. SAFP publishes original research, clinical reviews, and pertinent commentary that advance the knowledge base of these disciplines. The content of SAFP is designed to reflect and support further development of the broad basis of these disciplines through original research and critical review of evidence in important clinical areas; as well as to provide practitioners with continuing professional development material.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信